Connect with us

Blockchain

Four genuine blockchain use cases

Avatar

Published

on

Where shared ledgers add real value in enterprise IT

Almost a year after first releasing MultiChain, we’ve learnt a huge amount about how blockchains, in a private and non-cryptocurrency sense, can and cannot be applied to real-world problems. Allow me to share what we know so far.

To begin with, the first idea that we (and many others) started with, appears to be wrong. This idea, inspired by bitcoin directly, was that private blockchains (or “shared ledgers”) could be used to directly settle the majority of payment and exchange transactions in the finance sector, using on-chain tokens to represent cash, stocks, bonds and more.

This is perfectly workable on a technical level, so what’s the problem? In a word, confidentiality. If multiple institutions are using a shared ledger, then every institution sees every transaction on that ledger, even if they don’t immediately know the real-world identities of the parties involved. This turns out to be a huge issue, both in terms of regulation and the commercial realities of inter-bank competition. While various strategies are available or in development for mitigating this problem, none can match the simplicity and efficiency of a centralized database managed by a trusted intermediary, which maintains full control over who can see what. For now at least, it seems that large financial institutions prefer to keep most transactions hidden in these intermediary databases, despite the costs involved.

I base this conclusion not only on our own experience, but also on the direction taken by several prominent startups whose initial goal was to develop shared ledgers for banks. For example, both R3CEV and Digital Asset are now working on “contract description languages”, in Corda and DAML respectively (earlier examples include MLFi and Ricardian Contracts). These languages allow the conditions of a complex financial contract to be represented formally and unambiguously in a computer readable format, while avoiding the shortcomings of Ethereum-style general purpose computation. Instead, the blockchain plays only a supporting role, storing or notarizing the contracts in encrypted form, and performing some basic duplicate detection. The actual contract execution does not take place on the blockchain – rather, it is performed only by the contract’s counterparties, with the likely addition of auditors and regulators.

In the near term, this is probably the best that can be done, but where does it leave the broader ambitions for permissioned blockchains? Are there other applications for which they can form a more significant part of the puzzle?

This question can be approached both theoretically and empirically. Theoretically, by focusing on the key differences between blockchains and traditional databases, and how these inform the set of possible use cases. And in our case, empirically, by categorizing the real-world solutions being built on MultiChain today. Not surprisingly, whether we focus on theory or practice, the same classes of use case arise:

  • Lightweight financial systems.
  • Provenance tracking.
  • Interorganizational record keeping.
  • Multiparty aggregation.

Before explaining these in detail, let’s recap the theory. As I’ve discussed before, the two most important differences between blockchains and centralized databases can be characterized as follows:

  1. Disintermediation. Blockchains enable multiple parties who do not fully trust each other to safely and directly share a single database without requiring a trusted intermediary.
  2. Confidentiality: All participants in a blockchain see all of the transactions taking place. (Even if we use pseudonymous addresses and advanced cryptography to hide some aspects of those transactions, a blockchain will always leak more information than a centralized database.)

In other words, blockchains are ideal for shared databases in which every user is able to read everything, but no single user controls who can write what. By contrast, in traditional databases, a single entity exerts control over all read and write operations, while other users are entirely subject to that entity’s whims. To sum it up in one sentence:

Blockchains represent a trade-off in which disintermediation is gained at the cost of confidentiality.

In examining the four types of use case below, we’ll repeatedly come back to this core trade-off, explaining why, in each case, the benefit of disintermediation outweighs the cost of reduced confidentiality.

Lightweight financial systems

Let’s start with the class of blockchain applications that will be most familiar, in which a group of entities wishes to set up a financial system. Within this system, one or more scarce assets are transacted and exchanged between those entities.

In order for any asset to remain scarce, two related problems must be solved. First, we must ensure that the same unit of the asset cannot be sent to more than one place (a “double spend”). Second, it must be impossible for anyone to create new units of the asset on a whim (“forgery”). Any entity which could do either of these things could steal unlimited value from the system.

A common solution to these problems is physical tokens, such as metal coins or securely printed paper. These tokens trivially solve the problem of double spending, because the rules of physics (literally) prevent one token from being in two places at the same time. The problem of forgery is solved by making the token extremely difficult to manufacture. Still, physical tokens suffer from several shortcomings which can render them impractical:

  • As pure bearer assets, physical tokens can be stolen with no trace or recourse.
  • They are slow and costly to move in large numbers or over long distances.
  • It is tricky and expensive to create physical tokens that cannot be forged.

These shortcomings can be avoided by leaving physical tokens behind, and redefining asset ownership in terms of a ledger managed by a trusted intermediary. In the past, these ledgers were based on paper records, and today they tend to run on regular databases. Either way, the intermediary enacts a transfer of ownership by modifying the ledger’s content, in response to an authenticated request. Unlike settlement with physical tokens, questionable transactions can quickly and easily be reversed.

So what’s the problem with ledgers? In a nutshell, concentration of control. By putting so much power in one place, we create a significant security challenge, in both technical and human terms. If someone external can hack into the database, they can change the ledger at will, stealing others’ funds or destroying its contents completely. Even worse, someone on the inside could corrupt the ledger, and this kind of attack is hard to detect or prove. As a result, wherever we have a centralized ledger, we must invest significant time and money in mechanisms to maintain that ledger’s integrity. And in many cases, we require ongoing verification using batch-based reconciliation between the central ledger and those of each of the transacting parties.

Enter the blockchain (or “shared ledger”). This provides the benefits of ledgers without suffering from the problem of concentration. Instead, each entity runs a “node” holding a copy of the ledger and maintains full control over its own assets, which are protected by private keys. Transactions propagate between nodes in a peer-to-peer fashion, with the blockchain ensuring that consensus is maintained. This architecture leaves no central attack point through which a hacker or insider could corrupt the ledger’s contents. As a result, a digital financial system can be deployed more quickly and cheaply, with the added benefit of automatic reconciliation in real time.

So what’s the downside? As discussed earlier, all participants in a shared ledger see all of the transactions taking place, rendering it unusable in situations where confidentiality is required. Instead, blockchains are suitable for what I call lightweight financial systems, namely those in which the economic stakes or number of participants is relatively low. In these cases, confidentiality tends to be less of an issue – even if the participants pay close attention to what each other are doing, they won’t learn much of value. And it is precisely because the stakes are low that we prefer to avoid the hassle and cost of setting up an intermediary.

Some obvious examples of lightweight financial systems include: crowdfunding, gift cards, loyalty points and local currencies – especially in cases where assets are redeemable in more than one place. But we are also seeing use cases in the mainstream finance sector, such as peer-to-peer trading between asset managers who are not in direct competition. Blockchains are even being tested as internal accounting systems, in large organizations where each department or location must maintain control of its funds. In all these cases, the lower cost and friction of blockchains provides an immediate benefit, while the loss of confidentiality is not a concern.

Provenance tracking

Here’s a second class of use case that we repeatedly hear from MultiChain’s users: tracking the origin and movement of high-value items across a supply chain, such as luxury goods, pharmaceuticals, cosmetics and electronics. And equally, critical items of documentation such as bills of lading or letters of credit. In supply chains stretching across time and distance, all of these items suffer from counterfeiting and theft.

The problem can be addressed using blockchains in the following way: when the high-value item is created, a corresponding digital token is issued by a trusted entity, which acts to authenticate its point of origin. Then, every time the physical item changes hands, the digital token is moved in parallel, so that the real-world chain of custody is precisely mirrored by a chain of transactions on the blockchain.

If you like, the token is acting as a virtual “certificate of authenticity”, which is far harder to steal or forge than a piece of paper. Upon receiving the digital token, the final recipient of the physical item, whether a bank, distributor, retailer or customer, can verify the chain of custody all the way back to the point of origin. Indeed, in the case of documentation such as bills of lading, we can do away with the physical item altogether.

While all of this makes sense, the astute reader will notice that a regular database, managed (say) by an item’s manufacturer, can accomplish the same task. This database would store a record of the current owner of each item, accepting signed transactions representing each change of ownership, and respond to incoming requests regarding the current state of play.

So why use a blockchain instead? The answer is that, for this type of application, there’s a benefit to distributed trust. No matter where a centralized database is held, there will be people in that place who have the ability (and can be bribed) to corrupt its contents, marking forged or stolen items as legit. By contrast, if provenance is tracked on a blockchain belonging collectively to a supply chain’s participants, no individual entity or small group of entities can corrupt the chain of custody, and end users can have more confidence in the answers they receive. As a bonus, different tokens (say for some goods and the corresponding bill of lading) can be safely and directly exchanged, with a two-way swap guaranteed at the lowest blockchain level.

What about the problem of confidentiality? The suitability of blockchains for supply chain provenance is a happy result of this application’s simple pattern of transactions. In contrast to financial marketplaces, most tokens move in a single direction, from origin to endpoint, without being repeatedly traded back-and-forth between the blockchain’s participants. If competitors rarely transact with each other (e.g. toy manufacturer to toy manufacturer, or retailer to retailer), they cannot learn each others’ blockchain “addresses” and connect those to real-world identities. Furthermore, the activity can be easily partitioned into multiple ledgers, each representing a different order or type of good.

Finance-vs-Supply-Chain-Transactions

Interorganizational record keeping

Both of the previous use cases are based on tokenized assets, i.e. on-chain representations of an item of value transferred between participants. However there is a second group of blockchain use cases which is not related to assets. Instead, the chain acts as a mechanism for collectively recording and notarizing any type of data, whose meaning can be financial or otherwise.

One such example is an audit trail of critical communications between two or more organizations, say in the healthcare or legal sectors. No individual organization in the group can be trusted with maintaining this archive of records, because falsified or deleted information would significantly damage the others. Nonetheless it is vital that all agree on the archive’s contents, in order to prevent disputes.

To solve this problem, we need a shared database into which all of the records are written, with each record accompanied by a timestamp and proof of origin. The standard solution would be to create a trusted intermediary, whose role is to collect and store the records centrally. But blockchains offer a different approach, giving the organizations a way to jointly manage this archive, while preventing individual participants (or small groups thereof) from corrupting it.

One of the most enlightening conversations I’ve had in the past two years was with Michael Mainelli of Z/Yen. For 20 years his company has been building systems in which multiple entities collectively manage a shared digital audit trail, using timestamping, digital signatures and a round robin consensus scheme. As he explained the technical details of these systems, it became clear that they are permissioned blockchains in every respect. In other words, there is nothing new about using a blockchain for interorganizational recordkeeping – it’s just that the world has finally become aware of the possibility.

In terms of the actual data stored on the blockchain, there are three popular options:

  • Unencrypted data. This can be read by every participant in the blockchain, providing full collective transparency and immediate resolution in the case of a dispute.
  • Encrypted data. This can only be read by participants with the appropriate decryption key. In the event of a dispute, anyone can reveal this key to a trusted authority such as a court, and use the blockchain to prove that the original data was added by a certain party at a certain point in time.
  • Hashed data. A “hash” acts as a compact digital fingerprint, representing a commitment to a particular piece of data while keeping that data hidden. Given some data, any party can easily confirm if it matches a given hash, but inferring data from its hash is computationally impossible. Only the hash is placed on the blockchain, with the original data stored off-chain by interested parties, who can reveal it in case of a dispute.

As mentioned earlier, R3CEV’s Corda product has adopted this third approach, storing hashes on a blockchain to notarize contracts between counterparties, without revealing their contents. This method can be used both for computer-readable contract descriptions, as well as PDF files containing paper documentation.

Naturally, confidentiality is not an issue for interorganizational record keeping, because the entire purpose is to create a shared archive that all the participants can see (even if some data is encrypted or hashed). Indeed in some cases a blockchain can help manage access to confidential off-chain data, by providing an immutable record of digitally signed access requests. Either way, the straightforward benefit of disintermediation is that no additional entity must be created and trusted to maintain this record.

Multiparty aggregation

Technically speaking, this final class of use case is similar to the previous one, in that multiple parties are writing data to a collectively managed record. However in this case the motivation is different – to overcome the infrastructural difficulty of combining information from a large number of separate sources.

Imagine two banks with internal databases of customer identity verifications. At some point they notice that they share a lot of customers, so they enter a reciprocal sharing arrangement in which they exchange verification data to avoid duplicated work. Technically, the agreement is implemented using standard master–slave data replication, in which each bank maintains a live read-only copy of the other’s database, and runs queries in parallel against its own database and the replica. So far, so good.

Now imagine these two banks invite three others to participate in this circle of sharing. Each of the 5 banks runs its own master database, along with 4 read-only replicas of the others. With 5 masters and 20 replicas, we have 25 database instances in total. While doable, this consumes noticeable time and resources in each bank’s IT department.

Fast forward to the point where 20 banks are sharing information in this way, and we’re looking at 400 database instances in total. For 100 banks, we reach 10,000 instances. In general, if every party is sharing information with every other, the total number of database instances grows with the square of the number of participants. At some point in this process, the system is bound to break down.

So what’s the solution? One obvious option is for all of the banks to submit their data to a trusted intermediary, whose job is to aggregate that data in a single master database. Each bank could then query this database remotely, or run a local read-only replica within its own four walls. While there’s nothing wrong with this approach, blockchains offer a cheaper alternative, in which the shared database is run directly by the banks which use it. Blockchains also bring the added benefit of redundancy and failover for the system as a whole.

It’s important to clarify that a blockchain is not acting just as a distributed database like Cassandra or RethinkDB. Unlike these systems, each blockchain node enforces a set of rules which prevent one participant from modifying or deleting the data added by another. Indeed, there still appears to be some confusion about this – one recently released blockchain platform can be broken by a single misbehaving node. In any event, a good platform will also make it easy to manage networks with thousands of nodes, joining and leaving at will, if granted the appropriate permissions.

Although I’m a little skeptical of the oft-cited connection between blockchains and the Internet of Things, I think this might be where a strong such synergy lies. Of course, each “thing” would be too small to store a full copy of the blockchain locally. Rather, it would transmit data-bearing transactions to a distributed network of blockchain nodes, who would collate it all together for further retrieval and analysis.

Conclusion: Blockchains in Finance

I started this piece by questioning the initial use case envisioned for blockchains in the finance sector, namely the bulk settlement of payment and exchange transactions. While I believe this conclusion is becoming common wisdom (with one notable exception), it does not mean that blockchains have no other applications in this industry. In fact, for each of the four classes of use case outlined above, we see clear applications for banks and other financial institutions. Respectively, these are: small trading circles, provenance for trade finance, bilateral contract notarization and the aggregation of AML/KYC data.

The key to understand is that, architecturally, our four classes of use case are not specific to finance, and are equally relevant to other sectors such as insurance, healthcare, distribution, manufacturing and IT. Indeed, private blockchains should be considered for any situation in which two or more organizations need a shared view of reality, and that view does not originate from a single source. In these cases, blockchains offer an alternative to the need for a trusted intermediary, leading to significant savings in hassle and cost.

Please post any comments on LinkedIn.

Source: https://www.multichain.com/blog/2016/05/four-genuine-blockchain-use-cases/

Blockchain

Bitcoin Preis erreicht neues Allzeithoch bei 64.800 USD

Avatar

Published

on

Am 13. April 20201 ist der Bitcoin Kurs über das vorletzte Allzeithoch ausgebrochen.

Heute, am 14. April 2021 ist der Bitcoin Preis auf ein neues Allzeithoch (64.854 USD) angestiegen.

Bitcoin Kurs Tageschartanalyse

Der Bitcoin Preis ist gestern nach längerer Zeit über das Widerstandslevel bei 61.500 USD angestiegen, das seit dem letzten Allzeithoch vom 13. März 2021 intakt war. Heute, am 14. April 2021, erreichte der Bitcoin Kurs ein neues Allzeithoch bei 64.854 USD.

Das nächste Widerstandslevel liegt wahrscheinlich bei dem externen 1.61-Fib-Retracement-Level des letzten Drops (68.724 USD). Die technischen Indikatoren liefern uns eindeutig bullische Signale. Der MACD steigt wieder an, nachdem er ein Plateau erreicht hat. Der RSI und der „Stochastic Oscillator“ steigen ebenfalls weiter an. Darum wird Bitcoin Kurs wohl bald das gerade erwähnte Widerstandslevel erreichen.

Bitcoin Kurs Tageschart 14.04.2021
Bitcoin Kurs Tageschart By TradingView

Bitcoin Preis kurzfristiger Ausblick

Auf dem 2-Stunden-Chart siehst du, dass der Bitcoin Kurs über eine ansteigende Trendlinie angestiegen ist. Danach erreichte er das letzte Allzeithoch.

Weder der MACD noch der RSI signalisieren, dass die letzte Aufwärtsbewegung bereits wirklich an Fahrt verloren hat. Der RSI befindet sich zwar seit kurzem im überbewerteten Bereich. Allerdings kann der Kurs eines Assets trotzdem noch eine Zeit lang weiter steigen, während er im überbewerteten Bereich bleibt. Darum wird der Bitcoin Preis wohl kurzfristig insgesamt weiter ansteigen, auch wenn wir kleine Korrekturbewegungen sehen könnten.

Der Bitcoin Preis wird wohl bald wieder auf die zuvor erwähnte Trendlinie fallen. Diese ehemalige Widerstandslinie fungiert jetzt wahrscheinlich als Support.

Bitcoin Preis 14.04.2021
Chart By TradingView

Bitcoin Kurs Wellenanalyse

Laut unserer Wellenanalyse befindet sich der Bitcoin Kurs gerade in der dritten kleineren Teilwelle (Schwarz) er letzten Teilelle eines bullischen Impulses. Der Hochpunkt der letzten beiden Teilwellen wird voraussichtlich zwischen 83.000 USD und 90.423 USD liegen. Sobald die letzte, Orange Teilwelle vorbei ist, werden wir wahrscheinlich eine Korrekturphase sehen.

Hier geht es zu unserer Langzeitwellenanalyse.

Bitcoin Kurs Wellenanalyse 14.04.2021
Bitcoin Preis Chart By TradingView

Fazit

Der Bitcoin Preis wird wohl kurzfristig zumindest auf das Widerstandslevel bei 68.724 USD ansteigen. Mittelfristig wird der Bitcoin Kurs höchstwahrscheinlich ein neues Hoch zwischen 83.000 USD und 90.000 USD erzielen.

Hier geht es zur letzten Bitcoin-Analyse von BeInCrypto!

Eine interessante Krypto-Exchange für das Krypto-Trading und Investment in die verschiedenen Kryptowährungen: Stormgain.

Haftungsausschluss

Alle auf unserer Website enthaltenen Informationen werden nach bestem Wissen und Gewissen recherchiert. Die journalistischen Beiträge dienen nur allgemeinen Informationszwecken. Jede Handlung, die der Leser aufgrund der auf unserer Website gefundenen Informationen vornimmt, geschieht ausschließlich auf eigenes Risiko.

Share Article

Valdrin ist ein Kryptowährungs-Enthusiast und Finanzhändler. Nach seinem Master-Abschluss in Finanzmärkten an der Barcelona Graduate School of Economics begann er im Ministerium für wirtschaftliche Entwicklung in seinem Heimatland Kosovo zu arbeiten. Im Jahr 2019 beschloss er, sich ganz auf Kryptowährungen und den Handel zu konzentrieren.

MEHR ÜBER DEN AUTOR

Coinsmart. Beste Bitcoin-Börse in Europa
Source: https://de.beincrypto.com/bitcoin-preis-neues-allzeithoch-64-800-usd/

Continue Reading

Blockchain

Tech firm unveils Australian first initiative to help charities access blockchain funding

Avatar

Published

on

In an Australian first, social enterprise Little Phil is partnering with a cryptocurrency provider to provide local charities access to alternative and sustainable fundraising streams.

To deliver this groundbreaking initiative it is working with Netherlands-headquartered firm Legends of Crypto (LOC) – a non-fungible token trading card game – to implement a trial that will see 10% of all sales go towards directly funding selected causes on the Little Phil platform.

Non-fungible tokens, or NFTs, are a special class of digital assets that cannot be exchanged with one another for equal value, or broken down into smaller bits, that often operate as a type of collectors’ item and cannot be duplicated. These represent the next phase in the application of cryptocurrency technology with LOC itself receiving significant support from leading industry heavyweights such as the CEO of bitcoin.com.

This initiative is designed to provide not-for-profits access to alternative streams of fundraising outside of traditional avenues and aid them in diversifying their revenue raising activities.

According to Little Phil Co-founder and CEO, Josh Murchie this trial is designed to test the efficacy of alternative funding streams as it seeks to empower charities to diversify how they raise revenue for their causes.

“This is a really exciting trial for Little Phil and Legends of Crypto as we seek to test this groundbreaking fundraising trial,” said Mr Murchie.

“Although awareness among the public about crypto currency is generally around Bitcoin and maybe Ethereum, the reality is that this is just the tip of the iceberg in terms of the technology explosion in this space. What we are seeking to do here is to trial the efficacy of utilising NFT’s to create a recurring revenue stream for charities and see if we can free them up from continually asking for donors to donate.”

Founded in 2017, Little Phil is a total giving ecosystem that connects donors, businesses, and brands more directly with charities and beneficiaries through its Blockchain inspired Fintech technology platform that allows users to select a cause that they care about and directly give to that specific initiative – allowing them to track their impact in real-time.

Its technology provides donors full transparency around where their donations go, while providing charities the ability to showcase the difference every dollar makes as it provides not-for-profits the ability to give updates on the impact each gift has – ensuring transparent giving.

Some of its clients and partners include Greenpeace, mental health charity LIVIN, and the Currumbin Wildlife Sanctuary located on the Gold Coast.

That is why it is trialing the partnership within LOC’s marketplace that sees users buy and sell uniquely designed NFTs only available via its marketplace – as it adheres to this philosophy of directly allowing donors to connect via the causes they care about.

In this instance the 10 per cent of the funds raised will go directly towards cancer survivors requiring funding for their treatment.

For Josh Murchie, this initiative is all about ensuring that Little Phil is providing the charity sector access to funding and technology that might otherwise not be available to them.

“Last year we ran a national survey – the State of COVID report into Australia’s not-for-profit sector – that unearthed some of the biggest issues facing the industry as a result not just of the pandemic but broader micro and macro trends,” Mr Murchie said.

“One of the critical elements we unearthed from the data is that the sector is beset by two key issues, the giving behavior of Gen Z’s and millennials, along with digital transformation and technology usage. This trial, allows us to test the ability of charities to raise funds using the latest digital currency technology to hopefully better engage these demographic cohorts by creating greater connectivity with causes they care about using these new financial assets.”

Coinsmart. Beste Bitcoin-Börse in Europa
Source: https://australianfintech.com.au/tech-firm-unveils-australian-first-initiative-to-help-charities-access-blockchain-funding/

Continue Reading

Blockchain

COPA verklagt Craig Wright wegen Bitcoin-Copyright

Avatar

Published

on

Die gemeinnützige COPA-Organisation hat eine Klage gegen Craig Wright eingereicht und fordert von dem Gericht eine einstweilige Verfügung sowie eine Bestätigung, dass er keine Copyright-Ansprüche auf das Bitcoin-Whitepaper hat.

Die gemeinnützige Krypto-Organisation Cryptocurrency COPA (Cryptocurrency Open Patent Alliance) hat eine Klage gegen Craig Wright wegen seines Copyright-Anspruchs bzgl. des Bitcoin-Whitepapers eingereicht.

Die Organisation twitterte am 12. April 2021, dass sie ein Gerichtsverfahren bei dem britischen High Court of Justice einreichen wird, um „festzustellen, dass Mr. Craig Wright nicht das Bitcoin White Paper-Copyright besitzt“.

„Heute hat die COPA eine Klage eingeleitet, bei der der UK High Court aufgefordert wird, zu erklären, dass Mr. Craig Wright nicht das Urheberrecht am Bitcoin Whitepaper besitzt. Wir stehen auf der Seite der Bitcoin-Entwickler-Community und den vielen anderen, die bedroht wurden, weil sie das Whitepaper veröffentlicht haben.“

Die COPA fordert unter anderem, dass Wright nicht als Autor des Bitcoin White Papers anerkannt wird. Außerdem bittet sie um eine einstweilige Verfügung, die Wright davon abhält, zu behaupten, er sei der Autor des Whitepapers.

Wer ist die COPA?

Die COPA ist eine Non-Profit-Organisation, die laut eigene Angaben „versucht, Patente und Rechtsstreitigkeiten, die ein Hindernis für das Wachstum der Kryptowährungen sind, zu beseitigen“. Sie wurde von dem Unternehmen Square, das von Jack Dorsey gegründet wurde, ins Leben gerufen.

Die Organisation möchte den unethischen Missbrauch von Rechtswegen, mit dem teilweise Konkurrenten aus dem Weg geräumt werden sollen oder bei dem ausschließlich eigennützige Interessen vertreten werden, verhindern. In der Kryptobranche war dies leider schon öfters der Fall.

Wrights Anwälte behaupteten im Januar 2021, dass er einfach nur sein Copyright durchsetzen wolle. Außerdem schickten sie angeblich eine Nachricht an Square, in der sie erklärten, dass sie klagen würden, wenn Square das Whitepaper nicht von ihrer Seite entfernen würde. Wrights Anwälte bedrohten auch Bitcoin.org und Bitcoincore.org mit ähnlichen Nachrichten.

Ist Craig Wright Satoshi Nakamoto?

Wright ist derzeit in mehrere Rechtsstreitigkeiten verwickelt. Die meisten davon startete er selbst. Als Grundlage benutzte er seine Behauptung, dass er der Schöpfer von Bitcoin ist. In dem aufsehenerregendsten dieser Fälle wurde er aufgefordert, die Eigentumsrechte an den privaten Schlüsseln zu Satoshis Einlagen zu beweisen.

Viele Mitglieder der Krypto-Community zweifeln Wrights Behauptungen an. Die Klage der COPA Klage könnten dem Ganzen ein Ende bereiten.

Wird Wright irgendwann aufhören?

Wright behauptet schon seit langem, dass er der Schöpfer von Bitcoin ist. Er sagte sogar, dass er die private Keys zu Satoshis geheimen Bitcoin Wallets besitzt. Diese Behauptung handelte ihm allerdings einige Probleme ein.

Kurz nachdem er diese Behauptung als Grundlage für einen Rechtsstreit benutzt hat, wurde eine Text-Nachricht veröffentlicht, in der Wright als Betrüger bezeichnet wurde. Die Text-Nachricht wurde mit einer der Bitcoin Adressen signiert, die mit dem Rechtsstreit zu tun hatten.

Wright hat auch mehrere andere Ansprüche erhoben bzw. Rechtsverfahren eingeleitet und sogar eine Klage gegen Bitcoin-Entwickler eingereicht. Die Imageschäden, die Wraight wegen seiner dubiosen Rechtsstreitigkeiten erlitten hat, stärken nicht gerade seine Position vor den Gerichten. Trotzdem hält Wright an seiner Behauptung fest

Faketoshi: Doktorarbeit von Craig Wright ein Plagiat?

Übersetzt von Maximilian M.

Haftungsausschluss

Alle auf unserer Website enthaltenen Informationen werden nach bestem Wissen und Gewissen recherchiert. Die journalistischen Beiträge dienen nur allgemeinen Informationszwecken. Jede Handlung, die der Leser aufgrund der auf unserer Website gefundenen Informationen vornimmt, geschieht ausschließlich auf eigenes Risiko.

Share Article

Rahul Nambiampurath is an India-based Digital Marketer who got attracted to Bitcoin and the blockchain in 2014. Ever since, he’s been an active member of the community. He has a Masters degree in Finance. <a href=”mailto:editorinchief@beincrypto.com”>Email me!</a>

MEHR ÜBER DEN AUTOR

Coinsmart. Beste Bitcoin-Börse in Europa
Source: https://de.beincrypto.com/copa-klagt-craig-wright-bitcoin-copyright/

Continue Reading

Blockchain

Guide to Gambling with Ethereum Now and in the Future

Avatar

Published

on

In recent years, online gambling with the use of cryptocurrency has been increasing in popularity. One of the widely recognized cryptocurrencies in online gambling is Ethereum. However, despite its abrupt rise in popularity, many interested people still have little or no knowledge at all regarding how to gamble online using this crypto.

 Ethereum Defined

 Ethereum is a decentralized and blockchain-based technology. Several machines amounting to millions support this platform which is used to form a blockchain of several transactions that are all secured since they are all stored in every machine at once.

 Similar to Bitcoin, which is another popular cryptocurrency, the blockchain of Ethereum is a ledger that is viewed publicly and contains every transaction of the currency it supports. The currency for Ethereum is called Ether. 

 Ethereum was launched in the year 2015. During the years since its launch, Ethereum has significantly grown in value and size. Just like other cryptocurrencies today, it is used for payments online and has a peer-to-peer format presentation.

 Ether and other cryptocurrencies have many similarities. For one, a lot of cryptocurrencies can be used in several online casinos. To date, there are already several sites that accept Ether, and we can expect this to grow in number in the following years. 

 Despite the many similarities of Ether and other cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin, Ether has one major advantage which is the speed at which it processes its transactions. When you do a transaction using Bitcoin, the whole process usually takes 10 minutes more or less. Meanwhile, doing a transaction in Ethereum can be as fast as a mere 15 seconds.

 Gambling with Ethereum

 Now that we have a background on what Ethereum is, here’s how you can go and buy Ethereum so that you can use it for gambling in online casinos. 

  1. Register for a digital wallet

 A digital wallet or a cryptocurrency wallet is the one that holds all your cryptocurrencies. To buy Ether, you must first register or acquire a crypto wallet. There are many different types of digital wallets available today. Some of the most reliable and trusted are Coinbase, Bittrex, Gemini, Kraken, CoinMama, and many others. 

 A simple search for their official sites should do the trick. Visit their official sites and open an account. You may need to fill out a few personal information for this step. Generally, most digital wallets have a verification process through a phone call. Once you have successfully opened your digital wallet, you can then proceed to buy Ether. 

  1. Input your financial details

 Here is how digital wallets work. First, you need to put traditional money into it which may be done through the use of a credit card or a bank account. Take note that there may be some limitations to the method that you choose. After that, you will then need to enter your FIAT information. What this does is that allows you to move your cryptocurrency to and from your normal bank account.

  1. Buy Ether

 Your wallet will then allow you to buy many different cryptocurrencies available today. All you have to do is search for Ether and purchase your desired amount. Once the transaction is over, you should be able to see your Ether balance in your digital wallet.

  1. Start gambling

 Now that you have an Ethereum balance, you can now start gambling. There are many online casinos nowadays that accept Ether. If you are looking for a reliable and trusted Ethereum casino, you can visit Bitcoinbuster for a list of several online casinos that accepts Ethereum. 

 Once you have selected your desired online casino, the next thing that you need to do is connect your digital wallet to your gambling account. Simply choose Ether as your payment option then follow the steps until your funds will enter your gambling account.

 Ethereum Gambling Now and in the Future

 There are many advantages of using Ethereum in online gambling, one of which is security. Since every action you make is on the Ethereum blockchain, everything is encrypted and the online casino has no access to your personal information. Next is the speed of the transactions since Ethereum is known to be very fast and efficient in processing transactions.

 However, despite the several advantages, there are still many things on which Ethereum can improve upon.

 The first thing is the unpredictability of Ethereum’s value. Despite its upward trend in the world of cryptocurrency, Ethereum is still a fairly new cryptocurrency and its value fluctuates now and then. This means that you will not only be gambling on the online casino but also on the value of Ethereum itself.

 Apart from that, despite Ethereum’s growing popularity, there are still several online casinos that do not accept Ether.

 Shortly, however, it is safe to say that the value of Ethereum will stabilize or at least minimize that fluctuation rate. It could also mean that various sites will begin to adapt Ethereum and other cryptocurrencies.

Continue Reading
Blockchain3 hours ago

Bitcoin Preis erreicht neues Allzeithoch bei 64.800 USD

Esports5 hours ago

Code S RO16 Preview: Trap, Armani, sOs, Zest

Esports6 hours ago

Use this Cyper tripwire trick to lure enemies into your sites

Blockchain8 hours ago

Tech firm unveils Australian first initiative to help charities access blockchain funding

Esports9 hours ago

ESL Open Week #66: Stats, Clem, Solar win

Esports9 hours ago

Call of Duty anti-cheat update by Raven Software

Fintech9 hours ago

Wisr posts 19 consecutive quarters of growth

Esports10 hours ago

Position 5 Faceless Void is making waves in North American Dota 2 pubs after patch 7.29

Fintech10 hours ago

Software-based facial recognition in payments industry to dominate by 2025

Esports11 hours ago

Code S RO16: Rogue and INno advance to the RO8

Esports12 hours ago

FunPlus Phoenix Set to Face RNG in the 2021 LPL Spring Split Finals!

Esports12 hours ago

NHL’s Montreal Canadiens join esports industry

Esports12 hours ago

Keiti parts ways with Cloud9 White one month after signing

Fintech12 hours ago

Square extends lending arm to Australian businesses with Square Loans

Fintech13 hours ago

Strong representation again from Aussie FinTechs in the Deloitte Technology Fast 500 Asia Pacific

Fintech13 hours ago

Brokers fuel 100% growth at Aussie fintech Plenti

Esports14 hours ago

Ludwig breaks Ninja’s subscription record after over 30 days of streaming

Esports14 hours ago

CoD: Warzone Nuke Event Teaser Gives Possible Date

Esports14 hours ago

CoD: Temp Replaces Fire On Paris Legion’s CDL Roster

Esports14 hours ago

Steam version of Nier Automata is finally getting an update

Esports14 hours ago

Reports: Counter Strike: Global Offensive bug allows PC hack

Esports14 hours ago

100 Thieves signs Canadian Content Creator Kyedae

Esports14 hours ago

Call of Duty League 2021: Rosters, format, schedule, and more

Esports15 hours ago

World Cricket Championship 3 introduces dedicated esports mode with its latest update

Esports15 hours ago

Ludwig breaks Ninja’s Twitch sub record

Esports15 hours ago

100 Thieves sign VALORANT content creator Kyedae

Esports15 hours ago

The best FR 5.56 loadout in Call of Duty: Warzone Season 2

Esports15 hours ago

shroud explains why bottom fragging in Valorant is no big deal

Esports15 hours ago

mason banned from Twitch yet again after homophobic slur

Esports15 hours ago

PS5’s April Update now lets you use external storage options

Trending